Topic: Roger Ver and Jon Matonis pushed aside now that Bitcoin is becoming mainstream - page 7. (Read 46544 times)

From Jon's latest article :

"The powerful Bitcoin open-source development funnel will begin to suck in greater and greater talent driving applications that will have the broadest overall impact in the payments sphere."

I think we need to be open to the fact that this could mean new core developers as well besides Gavin. Is it likely that we got the perfect set right off the bat?

http://www.americanbanker.com/bankthink/the-elephant-in-the-payments-room-bitcoin-1058703-1.html?zkPrintable=1&nopagination=1

Why would such hardened statists insert themselves into such an anarchistic project ?  They really dont like you nor understand the word NO just like every other agent of the beast. Why would you say no to your own enslavement they have cookies.

Sirius can be contacted via the forum's private messaging feature. Thus far, though, it appears that he remains unaware of the present situation.

I have not forgotten. In fact I see more Of Jon's work than ever.

And they have absolute control over it or what? Why can't all other developers simply "band up" and remove this trouble from bitcoin.org? Why can't sirius do it? I thought he controlled bitcoin.org.

Whose idea was it, for a start? Seriously, who thought that putting a small list of people on bitcoin.org as "press contacts" would be a good idea?

Just remove this damn list from bitcoin.org for fuck sake!

It should have never been created in the first place. Journalists seeking for information should keep doing what they used to do: contacting people like those in the Bitcoin Magazine, in the Bitcoin Foundation, or individuals like Voorhees, Ver and Matonis.

Bitcoin.org should be as neutral as possible. Just expose the technology, that's all. Matonis, Ver and Voorhees are obviously perfect for PR, have been doing it greatly so far. The simple fact that they are not on this list shows how biased the list is. And IMHO bicoin.org should do the most it can to be as unbiased as possible. So, just remove the damn list.


Actually, where is sirius? Is he really OK with this? Does he really believe that Satoshi left him the domain so it could be used like that?

Don't you mean fork off?  JOKE PEOPLE.  For god's sake people stop this trollwar about press reps.

The real war about regulation will start when:
a few top bitcoin devs are quietly asked to make tools that track bitcoin users...
probably not that hard to do (heck, GPL it for all I care)...
and then those tools are used in the first litigations...

There might be some justifications: "because child porn"...
...but ultimately it could end in tears on either side of the fence.

There is no one to blame just a fundamental difference in opinion. If it continues, then a fork will occur and we will let the market sort it out.

Don't blame the foundation.

It's garzik, gmax, Luke, and saivann.

Honestly the dev team is just a bunch of power hungry people and rich now obviously. They are destroying bitcoins and don't care. GAVIN IS THE BIGGEST WUSSY OF THEM ALL, HE COLLECTS A CHECK FROM THE FOUNDATION AND THIS HOW HE REPAYS THE COMMUNITY.

He picks developers that can't even make one thing fair. This is complete chaos and shows they are incompetent of doing things as a community. I have no respect for them, and I hope this brings out other developers to create there own full node clients and switch to a group that isn't power hungry. They should be ashamed how they are acting. This against all bitcoin core values and making Satoshi throw up with disgust.

I love how Jgarzik is on the press list, I wonder who did that. The dude can't even really speak and that is being nice. I saw one video.

+1

All this really just demonstrates that it should be emphasized that entities with "Bitcoin" in their name do not speak for the majority of Bitcoin users, and may in fact speak for absolutely nobody but themselves.  Most of the media is too stupid to give a decent explanation of Bitcoin or anything else without assistance.  They will tend to seek out the biggest loudmouths in sight, just like on any other issue.

Search engine results are where it's at, because that is where anyone seriously considering Bitcoin will look.  Even if the "official" client is the first site, there should be effort put into making sure dissenting views are also available, preferably right below the people trying to set themselves up as "official."

(Even better above them, but just having "bitcoin" in the domain name is going to be big Google juice, not to mention on other search engines.)

yes, gmax's response to me yesterday was amazing; he said he will never let the majority dominate the minority as a guiding principle and gleefully is applying this to the press center vote.

this goes against the economic principles of majority rule that satoshi built into the code.

The illusion that the USA is not an economic dictatorship is becoming increasingly difficult to maintain and this makes some people uncomfortable. They have some reason for not wanting to deal with this reality so they choose to ignore it instead, as if not acknowledging it will help them somehow.

Yet another radical extremist with anti-government views.  Someone please tell this guy to shut up, he is undoubtedly a blabbermouth with no experience in public relations.  What unwashed anarchist squat did this unemployed idiot come from?  Clearly not a mainstream voice.  Oh, wait...


Please do not put him on the PR page.  God forbid we have this type of megasuccessful, megasmart person with an impeccable CV representing Bitcoin, spreading the news to people living under economic dictatorships the extremist idea that Bitcoin can make their miserable lives better.  Too political!

 
that would defeat the purpose, which is the exercise of unaccountable power by a few. There is no modicum of inclusion principles. They have expressed an explicitly exclusionary perspective that says that the views of three devs are the "moderate" mainstream and... shove it. I believe the dev kings hold court and the peasants can ask for favors, but don't ask for any process or consistency.

Hey!  Why not just let people just categorize themselves on the press page as having some political or philosophical affiliation (and ask them to do it honestly.)  Those who opt to not to do this are simply under the obligation to leave their personal political opinions at the studio door.

Then if some rabid Libertarian/Atheist/Commie/whatever makes so startling statement it can be pointed out that they were potentially selected on the basis of their underlying belief system and it is not necessarily shared by all.

This would also demonstrate to the any observer who visited the press page that Bitcoin has at least a modicum of 'big tent' inclusion principles and is not dominated by one line of political thought or whatever.

The rules do not apply to them, only to "new" candidates. The new candidates get quoted out of context. But for the existing people context matters.

Don't try to find logic or reason - they use those to distract you from the decisions that have already been made, entirely based on personal bias. There is no consistency or even an attempt to be fair and consistent. They have no shame and will contradict themselves every other post.  I believe this was rule change #18 - Existing Press Center members can say outrageous things and be held to a different standard.

Looks like Trace Mayer was absolved of his heresy this time around:


Perhaps in the coming weeks and months we'll learn how many slaps on the wrist it takes to excommunicate a Bitcoin.org "press representative".

It's the classic answer of cowards - especially in this case since they are not even talking about code, but about SPEECH, the press center no less.

It's a perfectly valid answer if there is no possible way to discuss. Forks are the last resort, not the first. The guys are throwing out "go fork" as a way to end debate, rather than as a last resort after debate has died.

It is exactly like those who shout "If you don't like this law, LEAVE the country".

They are so allergic to opposing views and any discussion, they use "go fork" as a way to dismiss the peons.

I for one, was not aware that several of the developers had very low tolerance for different opinions, a very defensive reaction to any critical view and a childish need to make everyone else bend to their decisions. I was expecting a higher level of maturity, but I have been shocked to find a schoolyard atmosphere. The worst part is they portray themselves simultaneously as heroes of bitcoin and victims of terrible oppression by anyone who disagrees. It's quite pathetic really.

Now of course, I think on the topic of press representation at least, the debate is very much over. They will not tolerate any process that has the possibility of an outcome they don't agree with.

Now it is indeed time to fork the press center. I'm starting with the organizational structure and the source of authority - the community of bitcoin users. Users are the source of authority as bitcoin becomes mainstream. Not 3-4 coders of one of the implementation.